Armenia may lose Karabakh without pedaling 'genocide' and its diaspora links

By Vestnik Kavkaza
Armenia may lose Karabakh without pedaling 'genocide' and its diaspora links

"The greatest genocide of the 20th century was committed against the Turkish nation, and for many years we have offered to open our archives for those who have long voiced Armenia's claims. There are 1,700,000 documents in the archives of the General Staff of the Turkish Armed Forces, of which 1 million are available to date. We propose opening the archives to clarify the situation with the so-called genocide of Armenians. But our proposal has not been accepted yet," Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said recently.

Russian political scientist Andrei Yepifantsev explained on his Facebook page why Armenia needs to promote the 'Armenian genocide' and why the Turks say little about the "genocide of the Turks".

"Everyone has heard absolutely unsubstantiated and inflated statistics of Armenians killed by the Turks in 1914-1921 - some 1.5-2 million people, while the number of Turks killed by Armenians, that they can prove, are quite as much, if not more. Otherwise, I think the real number in each of the cases will  fluctuate within the range of 100-300 thousand people.

They repeatedly objected to me, asking why don't Turks speak about their own genocide then? But that's not true, they do speak. Another thing is that the perception of the genocide for the Turks is completely different from the Armenians' perception, at least in terms of three dimensions:

1. It did not begin with the Armenians, but with the Balkan territories in the late 19th century, especially since the beginning of the 20th century - since the Balkan Wars, when the killing of Turkish settlers by the Greeks and the southern Slavs was not so different from the Turks' actions against them centuries ago.

2. In general, Turkey is very cautious about the word "genocide", among other reasons because the Turks themselves are accused in this respect. But they can be victims as well!

3. And most importantly: For the Turks, unlike the Armenians, the recognition of the genocide, the memory of it and the discussion of this issue in the international arena is not of the utmost importance! Now. In modern times. But for Armenians this is perhaps the strongest bond of an extremely divided people. We, Russians, are still looking for our bonds, and Armenians have long found them - it's a "genocide" and it does not matter whether it is factually confirmed or not. In the context of a shortage of foreign policy instruments affecting the Turks and Azerbaijanis, a "genocide" is a very important such tool for Armenia. And it works.

Without pedaling of the 'genocide' and if Armenia's links with its Diaspora, for which it is the key issue, weaken, the support for Armenia will decline. And then goodbye, Karabakh...

4. The possibility of pedaling the issue of its own genocide by Armenians in the international arena is much lower for Turkey than of the Armenian Genocide - for the Armenians. The countries support the Armenian 'genocide' in many ways as an instrument of pressure on Turkey and in this case there is a request for it from Turkey's rivals. The weight of Armenia's weight in the world is incomparably lower than Turkey's one, and hence the request will also be lower. It is not clear for Ankara whether it makes sense to deal with this topic. Although it is obvious that if Armenia and the diaspora decide to recognize the 'genocide' in accordance with international law, that is, submission to the UN courts, then the issue of Armenians' atrocities against Muslims, as well as the issue of a comparison of the number of civilian casualties killed by the other side in both cases will definitely be raised, and the world public will be surprised, because they will be at least comparable.

Therefore, in reality ... I have already cited this example ... the situation with the so called 'Armenian genocide' is such that it is like in the fairy tale about the Little Red Riding Hood and the Wolf, where in spite of the fact that everyone thinks that the Wolf as an unconditional symbol of evil, and the Hood - of good, IN REALITY Red Riding Hood is even more violent and cruel than the Wolf and wants to kill and eat the Wolf at least as much as the Wolf - her. "